Tony Tea

There's been a shed-load of trouble at the Casey council over the proposed financial arrangements with Melbourne. And just now an email arrives, the gist of which is: "The Casey deal went to [censored] last night."

Yeah, let's ask Schwarta. While we're at it, let's ask Simon from Ivanhoe, Billy from West Heidelberg, Brad from Eltham and Jim from Hawthorn. That ought to clear everything up.

No. Clarkson was appointed at the end of 2004.

Past it. Copeland atrophy. Boom. Tish.

Nostradenham: for the last two seasons Denham confidently predicted Melbourne would make the Eight. Not that that has anything to do with inside info. Or does it? Hmmm.

Warnock ran straight to Carlton as soon as he saw the dreaded Power Point presentation.

Keeping the bidders to just Carlton and Melbourne: if we keep bettering Carlton's offer, then Freo are duty-bound to accept our offer. If Warnock is still reluctant to come to Melb, he must then put himself into the PSD and put a price on his head that we would be unwilling to pay and hope to slip through to Carlton. In theory.

Carazzo: Italian for turnover. Still, give Carlton credit where it's due. They are on a roll. They have close to the best on-ball running brigade in the comp. They will almost certainly (barring injuries) make the finals next year. They will look to select or trade for key backs in up-coming drafts. They are currently a better prospect than Melbourne.

Quite true, Jack. Carlton, Melbourne and Freo knew at least as early as Tuesday that Warnock would nominate Carlton: And:

Any so-called anguish engendered by potentially trading Green and/or Bruce has a parallel in the potential trading of Yze and/or White a few years ago. Collingwood and Carlton offered big money for both, but we held onto them by paying over their worth. (Incidentally, we need to avoid the same trap in chasing Warnock.) Had we made the hard call - or should that simply be the "right" call? - and traded Y & W we would not be groaning about paying them big money, and we could have possibly received a better player in return. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but if the club had their time again they would not have over-rated the list and almost certainly would have looked to offload any or all of White, Yze, Green and Bruce when their market value was at a premium. Ask yourself: are you happy with the Travis trade? I know I am. Most every player has their price. It's no different with Green and Bruce. If either wants to bail, we should let them. If we can scoop a handy pick for either, we should go for it. But it's probably too late. We MUST be prepared to make the hard calls on any of the remaining medium ability players who failed to deliver us a flag.

Ancient football saying: "Visy will provide."

Agree that Carlton can get White for rock all. Currently the Blues are presented with two draft options: 1) Kreuzer & Hampson with White as a mentor; and 2) Kreuzer, Hampson & Warnock. Both would be viable arrangements. But with White all-but gone, surely Carlton would go for the latter to get a versatile ruck department with Kreuzer for mobility, Hampson for grunt and Warnock for height. Don't forget Ratten played with Justin Madden, so he's well aware of the importance of bean-pole ruckmen who can get first hand on the agate.

They don't have to give us anything for White, they can simply scoop him up in the PSD. But they can also stuff us around over Warnock. Question: is Warnock that good that we should get in a bidding war with Carlton and Visy over his signature?

Finally, some good news.

That Carlton as-good-as have Warnock across the line. Although: Both White and Warnock are on the market. Carlton could make a play for Warnock, drive his price up, have us pay over the odds for him, and then take White for next-to-nothing in the pre-season draft.

Will Carlton want White now that they think they have Warnock?

This just in! Robbie Warnock is set to sign for Visy and do part-time work for Carlton. (Amcor would protest, but they want a piece of the action.)

Well, I know the (alleged) full story, and while I'm not so precious as to be shocked, I certainly think Carroll has played his last game for Melbourne.

Agreed, Deelicious. Getting in a fight is small beer compared to the other stuff.

Yeah, but we were also known for a short time as the Hot Socks, so perhaps we should opt for tights.

Pretty spot on, Rhino. The silver abomination reeked of AFL, corporate, marketing department dross. "Hey! Here's an idea: 5 year old Melbourne fans will want to use it for a pyjama top." The rest of us wouldn't use it to clean our cars.

Since you mention it, Nightmare, a few carrots and some peas would improve A.

No, it wouldn't be; it just looked rubbish.

B, with its classic look, is miles better. A is rubbish. Hannabal is right: we've had the MFC logo for years, stuff Carlton. So what if the Bloos - and the Brizroy logo for Melbourne games, for that matter - are similar. In fact, EVERY club that came from the VFL probably has a similar styled logo in their history, or even right now on their stationery. A looks like it should be the Bulldogs alternate strip.

Well, I like the one on the right, the one with the MFC monogram. The Demon logos give me the sh1ts as they all look like they've been designed by the 12 year old children of ad-agency executives. Meanwhile. There have been 175 votes and it's tied 50% to 50%. Update! Spot on, Demonologist.